Whose got the oldest AR?

[henpecked]

Still have my colt SP1 bought in 1977. Was my only AR till 1994.
Still have it, Still shoot it. PAID 317.00 for it brand new.


Steve

[275RLTW]

We still run an original Colt M16A1 lower for training. Not sure of year, but at least pre-86. Upper is immaculate as well (lives in the safe, replaced by 10" uppers)

[Gunner]

Pictures!

[gcrookston]

1964 --

http://i268.photobucket.com/albums/jj19/gcrookston/dsc00157bm9.jpg
http://i268.photobucket.com/albums/jj19/gcrookston/dsc00170zb2.jpg
http://i268.photobucket.com/albums/jj19/gcrookston/dsc00165rw3.jpg

[argonstrom]

1964 --

That is so cool! How does it shoot?

[gcrookston]

That is so cool! How does it shoot?

It is 'combat accurate' -- won't win any prizes. I've put about 40 rounds through it in the 4 years I've had it, with groups averaging 2.5 to 3.5 MOA with standard M193.

I bought it because it was a pretty good deal at the time and I'd not come across many unmolested 1st generation SP1 rifles.

I currently have 3 other AR types that are much more accurate and see much more range time.

[KevDen2005]

How come it is caliber-ed in .223 and not 5.56. I am guessing there is some historical lesson here that I am not aware of.

[gcrookston]

How come it is caliber-ed in .223 and not 5.56. I am guessing there is some historical lesson here that I am not aware of.

The early M16 (601 and 602) and SP1 rifles and magazines were all marked '.223'. The Air Force continued up until about 1968 marking theirs '.223', while the Army changed over to the NATO STANAG designation '5.56' sometime in 1967-68 with the adoption of the M16A1 (604). SP1s into the 1970's were still marked .223 - at least into the 40k# range, probably beyond.

Both the Colt civilian AR15 and Military M16 rifles shared the same components, including barrels. I've found no evidence that the chambers of the early SP1s differed from their military counterparts in that they were both designed specifically for the M193 5.56x45 cartridge.

For a time in 1963-64 the AR15 was the only production rifle chambered in the then new .223 / 5.56 available to the public. Remington didn't even introduce the "new" .223 to the public until 1964.

BUT, the .223 designation had been around as early as 1959 to differentiate the round from the .222, .222 special and .224 calibres then being experimented with by Armalite and Springfield. It wasn't standardized into what we know today as the M193 until about 1960-61 (?) by Eugene Stoner working with Winchester. About 14,500 prototype and trial rifles were manufactured and tested from 1959-1963 and all but a few hundred are marked '.223' and chambered for what would be adopted as the M193 5.56x45 NATO cartridge.

[StagLefty]

Interesting info-Thanks [Beer]

[KevDen2005]

The early M16 (601 and 602) and SP1 rifles and magazines were all marked '.223'. The Air Force continued up until about 1968 marking theirs '.223', while the Army changed over to the NATO STANAG designation '5.56' sometime in 1967-68 with the adoption of the M16A1 (604). SP1s into the 1970's were still marked .223 - at least into the 40k# range, probably beyond.

Both the Colt civilian AR15 and Military M16 rifles shared the same components, including barrels. I've found no evidence that the chambers of the early SP1s differed from their military counterparts in that they were both designed specifically for the M193 5.56x45 cartridge.

For a time in 1963-64 the AR15 was the only production rifle chambered in the then new .223 / 5.56 available to the public. Remington didn't even introduce the "new" .223 to the public until 1964.

BUT, the .223 designation had been around as early as 1959 to differentiate the round from the .222, .222 special and .224 calibres then being experimented with by Armalite and Springfield. It wasn't standardized into what we know today as the M193 until about 1960-61 (?) by Eugene Stoner working with Winchester. About 14,500 prototype and trial rifles were manufactured and tested from 1959-1963 and all but a few hundred are marked '.223' and chambered for what would be adopted as the M193 5.56x45 NATO cartridge.


That is really awesome. Thanks for the info!

[coop68]

here is my question i apoligize if its somthing i just missed and or miss understood!

since you have a lower that was produced before 1986 could you technology convert it to a registered sear edit: or as a machine gun? or because it wasn't register during the grace period of 1986 its classified as a normal semi-auto AR? just curious.

[gcrookston]

here is my question i apoligize if its somthing i just missed and or miss understood!

since you have a lower that was produced before 1986 could you technology convert it to a registered sear? or because it wasn't register during the grace period of 1986 its classified as a normal semi-auto AR? just curious.

The sear is the machine gun. The rest of the weapon is just a parts host. My experience is limited to a 3 calibre registered Fleming sear for the HK9x platform. My sear saw use in HK91, 93, 94 and SP89 guns. I never gave a thought to when the host was manufactured. I could have been walking on thin ice, but your question is the first time I've ever heard anything about it in my personal experience with the ATF.

[coop68]

The sear is the machine gun. The rest of the weapon is just a parts host. My experience is limited to a 3 calibre registered Fleming sear for the HK9x platform. My sear saw use in HK91, 93, 94 and SP89 guns. I never gave a thought to when the host was manufactured. I could have been walking on thin ice, but your question is the first time I've ever heard anything about it in my personal experience with the ATF.

i used the wrong language when asking my question it kind of answers it self!

[Circuits]

M193 is not a "5.56 NATO" cartridge, as it predates the specification.

5.56x45 NATO is a 62gr, enhanced penetration bullet (originally designed by FN and designated the SS109 projectile), loaded to certain specifications, as accepted under STANAG in 1980. M855 is a US military designation for their ammunition which meets the "5.56 NATO" specification.

There is no "5.56mm NATO" chamber specification, either - there are individual weapon specifications, like an M16 chamber, or M249 chamber, and those chamber specs are as big or bigger than any .223 REM SAAMI specification, and intended to eat 5.56 NATO ammo.

A lot of manufacturers who chamber to the M16 specification, though, label their barrels "5.56" or "5.56 NATO".

[gcrookston]

M193 is not a "5.56 NATO" cartridge, as it predates the specification.

5.56x45 NATO is a 62gr, enhanced penetration bullet (originally designed by FN and designated the SS109 projectile), loaded to certain specifications, as accepted under STANAG in 1980. M855 is a US military designation for their ammunition which meets the "5.56 NATO" specification.

There is no "5.56mm NATO" chamber specification, either - there are individual weapon specifications, like an M16 chamber, or M249 chamber, and those chamber specs are as big or bigger than any .223 REM SAAMI specification, and intended to eat 5.56 NATO ammo.

A lot of manufacturers who chamber to the M16 specification, though, label their barrels "5.56" or "5.56 NATO".

You are correct, the process of adopting the 5.56 to replace the 7.62 as the cartridge of choice began in the 1970's. The UN in the 1950's moved to formalize the metric system globally, but this was a slow process in the US Military.

M193 is the US designation, not a NATO one, I erred. But M193 is 5.56x45 and is not .223 Remington. Although .223 can be fired in 5.56x45 without concern, the 5.56 should not be fired in a .223 chambered gun. The SP1 was a 5.56x45.

The two rounds on the left are 5.56x45 fired from a .223 chambered rifle. The two rounds on the right were fired from a 5.56 chamber. All four rounds are from the same lot of Lake City...
http://i268.photobucket.com/albums/jj19/gcrookston/DSC00149.jpg

[jscwerve]

There was an sp1 or sp2, I don't remember which at the Tanner show in September. It was REEEEEAAAAALLLLY hard not to take it home with me. I would love to have a piece of nostalgia like that at home.

[gcrookston]

Every time I see one of those old M16s it reminds me of the literally thousands of green army men I purchased by the bag for $1. All those classic poses-bayonet charging, kneeling, bazooka, and empty hand grenade thrower. I spent literally weeks fighting wars against the bad guys. They didn't make Vietcong/Ruskie bad guys so I always had to improvise.

Tor

I also pretty much started my collecting because of those army men, and my father had been a Drill Instructor during WW2. I'd go around the neighborhood when I was a kid and ask guys about my Dad's age if they had been in the military and if they had anything they'd like to donate to my museum (I started when I was about 8). When I was old enough I started collecting the guns to go along with all the crap, eventually focusing on German and American 1905-1965. This AR is the tail end of my collection, along with a Type 56 and Type 54 brought back from Vietnam in 1967...